Anyone keen on space exploration news has definitely heard of the ESA’s mission to land a robotic probe on the 67P comet otherwise known as Churyumov–Gerasimenko. Welcome to the Rosetta conspiracy.
The intergovernmental European Space Agency began its exploration journey to 67P C-G in 2004 when the Ariane 5G+ was launched from French Guiana carrying the Rosetta spacecraft on board.
The lander, Philae, was of course attached to the Rosetta from where it would be launched to finally set mankind on a comet.
Now, this was great news for the world…it was like conquering the final frontier.
We’ve practically landed on everything else you can possibly think of. Our moon, other planets, moons of other planets, and asteroids. Landing on a comet was totally going to be epic news, right?
But wait, something doesn’t add up…somebody somewhere is either playing a very bad joke on the entire world or the mission was a total flop, but a fabricated story had to be staged to hoodwink us and save some faces or justify donor budgets!
See, we’re all looking for answers and landing on a comet would definitely give us a few clues about our solar system since these comets are usually relics from the solar nebula.
Studying the organic compositions of these celestial bodies can help us find some key answers about the origin of life itself or the presence of other life forms.
Again, it is known that the 67P comes from the Kuiper belt and we don’t get so many things from beyond our solar system that we can land on. So this was a nice chance…a once in a lifetime chance you can say…
But, the important question still remains…did the ESA really land a probe successfully on the comet?
The anomalies surrounding this event keep piling up.
Let’s check out some facts…
The Missing Tail…
First, what do we know about comets?
Comets have a nucleus, which is basically a mixture of rocks and ices. They have a coma…the gases that form a cloud around the nucleus.
And now to the interesting part…comets have a dust tail that forms from the dust particles escaping from the comet and an ion tail that they pick up from solar winds when they fly closer to the sun.
Interestingly, the 67P lacks a tail. All photos of the comet taken from the Rosetta don’t show any vapor trail!
And that’s not the only “un-comet-like” problem with the 67P…
A Comet Out of Shape!
Look at any photo captured by the Rosetta and you will notice the odd shape. Of course the Churyumov–Gerasimenko was not only discovered by a duo…but the shape strongly suggests that the comet is a product of 2 celestial bodies.
Now, the photos show two lobes that form a boot or some crude version of a boomerang from 10, 000 BC!
The only problem is that the thing has no aerodynamic shape which is a common feature with comets.
67P gets to maximum speeds of 84, 000 mph with a rotation of about 12.4 hours. Logic tells you that this comet should at least have an aerodynamic shape from the high speeds it clocks…and that is surprisingly missing too!
No Glow, No Twinkling Stars
Again, back to the photos from the Rosetta…
Photos allegedly taken on the 29th of August and on the 19th of September 2014 show no stars in the background.
At a distance of almost 4 AU from the sun, you’d expect the stars to be bright and clearly visible in the background since they don’t need the sun to generate any light.
The fiery glow emitted by high-speed comets such as 67P C-G is also missing. This brings us to one conclusion…advanced poor Photoshop!
We know that the ESA team had developed images (including 3D models) of the Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet way back in 2003 as the Rosetta mission was being finalized and prepped for lift-off.
It is highly suggestive that these photos are just a terrible Photoshop lie from the ESA labs.
Controversial Technological Impossiblities
As mentioned earlier, the 67P comet can hit high speeds of 84,000 mph, but we are told that it was traveling at a lower speed of about 34, 000 mph during the rendezvous with the Rosetta; which is still very high.
Now, what do we know about the Philae lander so far?
The thing weighs approximately 100 Kgs and it was designed with cold blusters to help it get the correct approaching thrust.
It was also equipped with a harpoon to help it attach itself to the high-speed flying rock, and lastly, springy legs to cushion the high-speed landing action plus ice screws to help the lander get a firmer grip on the comet once it was settled in position.
Here comes the juicy part…
Reports from the ESA team running ground controls on the Rosetta and Philae say that after being released from the orbiter, the lander’s thrusters failed to kick-off and the harpoon also did not deploy!
Okay…we know that the 67P is approximately 4km by 4km at its widest dimensions and it was traveling at a speed of 34, 000 mph.
We also know that comets have a lower gravitational pull making it easy for objects to escape their atmosphere and lastly, more reports from the ESA say that the probe’s landing was not so smooth because it bounced around for a few hours before coming to a stop on the wrong spot (“site J” now known as Agilkia).
How did Philae end up on the wrong side of the comet?
ESA reports collected from the lander say that the Philae bounced twice and actually rose to an altitude of about 1 km off the comet on first impact.
It took about 1 hour and 11 minutes (between 16:20 and 17:31 UTC) for the lander to finally come to a full stop.
Questions to ponder: Traveling at these super-sonic speeds…how did the 10 year old Philae land on the comet on the first try without?
(1) Thrusters to help it maneuver the high-speed precision landing? …and
(2) The harpoon to firmly attach itself on the low gravity fast moving rock?
Plus… if it bounced to an altitude of about 1 km on a rock moving at 34, 000 mph, how did it manage to stay on the rock’s surface after bouncing twice?
This is in consideration to the lack of any magnetic field on the comet, the rock’s traveling speed and lastly, its size. This just doesn’t add up!
Is it beginner’s luck? Is it all a sham?
And now to the tricky communications part…
Ground control was apparently orchestrated from Germany (ESOC, Darmstadt). Now, with the speeds involved, communication between earth and the lander would have to be relayed through the Rosetta at the speed of light!
This is utterly impossible!
Again, it is well known that there was a lag of about 28 minutes (note: not seconds…minutes) in all “real-time” communications between the earth station(s) and the lander.
How then did they manage this high-speed precision landing if we cannot communicate at the speed of light.
We can hardly find steady Wi-Fi or phone signals from here on Earth but get this…the Philae had no problem Twitting from 67P, from a distance of 3.3 AU (approx. 490 million kilometers from earth), matching a speed of 34, 000 mph?!
Lights, Camera, No Action!
We’re not even going to dwell on this for long…please ESA tells us, where the hell is the video evidence?
We can almost forgive you for setting up the Philae with 60 hour-life batteries but this is totally unforgivable!
You would think that for a mission of this magnitude the ESA would invest on capturing any sort of video evidence for bragging rights?!
Well, guess what?
All they have is a minute video showing a bunch of guys working and jumping up in a space station…apparently from the successful touch down.
The ESA has continued to give out more reports collected from the Philae which unfortunately went into safe-mode after the batteries died almost immediately upon landing!
Oh boy…what a fine way to kill a hoax before it even takes off the ground?
Okay, the lander was fitted with solar panels to power the Philae lander in the event the batteries died but these have not been very effective either.
This has done nothing but to deepen the Rosetta conspiracy. Is the ESA just looking for a way out of answering pressing questions about the Rosetta mission?
What do you think?
Did we land on a comet or was it all a hoax?